Re: Please, Tell Me Why

Notice that the bloodthirsty hate-filled traitor only wishes
more could be killed, although there's no reason for it.

False Document <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>It would have at least helped if anyone of the following were true: 
>a) Iraq attacked us
>b) Iraq actually had WMD
>c) Iraq had actually lied in their weapons disclosure
>d) Hussein had actually had contacts with Al Qaeda.
>
>When the president and all his people have to lie repeatedly to justify a 
>war, then perhaps one needs to consider that it might not have been 
>justifiable based on truth.

What an excellent point.

On 2 Dec 2003 14:56:33 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>This War Not Against Terrorists 
>
>by Jay Bookman 
>
>12/01/03: (Atlanta Journal-Constitution) From the beginning, the Bush
>administration's inability to talk straight about its Iraq policy has
>generated deep and valid suspicion. Good policy doesn't need to be
>defended by deception; the truth will do just fine.
>
>We didn't get the truth a year ago, when Bush officials implausibly
>claimed that Saddam Hussein posed a dire threat to U.S. security.
>We're not getting the truth today, as President Bush and others depict
>our struggle in Iraq as some sort of defense of the American homeland.
>
>"We are aggressively striking the terrorists in Iraq, defeating them
>there," Vice President Dick Cheney said a week ago, "so we do not have
>to face them on the streets of our own cities."
>
>"You are defeating the terrorists in Iraq, so we don't have to face
>them in our country," President Bush likewise told U.S. troops during
>his lightning visit to Baghdad.
>
>Such statements are simply false. Our men and women in uniform are not
>fighting for their lives against international terrorists in Iraq.
>They are not fighting the people who attacked us on Sept. 11, nor are
>they fighting allies of those people.
>
>Instead, the guerrillas who are launching mortars at our military
>bases, attacking our troops on patrol or hiding booby traps on Iraqi
>highways are native Iraqis who are trying to evict American troops
>from their country. Despicable and cowardly as their tactics are, the
>Iraqi resistance is almost entirely Iraqi.
>
>They are not attacking us because they hate Americans. They are
>attacking us because they hate Americans who are occupying their
>country.
>
>Bureaucrats and politicians in Washington try repeatedly to pretend
>otherwise, suggesting that al-Qaida-linked terrorists are pouring into
>Iraq from Syria, Iran and even Saudi Arabia to attack our troops. But
>U.S. generals in Iraq, the people actually doing the fighting, have
>said repeatedly that they have seen little evidence of international
>involvement. Furthermore, the captains, majors and colonels charged
>with guarding Iraq's borders report no influx of foreign terrorists
>into Iraq and are puzzled by claims to the contrary.
>
>Here is what the Bush administration does not want to admit to the
>American people:
>
>We are fighting two different wars today, against two very different
>enemies. The first war, against international terror, was brought to
>our shores by the attacks of Sept. 11, and we had no choice but to
>respond aggressively, with every bit of power we could muster. The
>invasion of Afghanistan, the toppling of its Taliban government and
>the destruction of al-Qaida bases in that country were justified and
>necessary responses, and if anything should have been prosecuted even
>more aggressively than they were.
>
>The war against Iraq, on the other hand, has been a war of choice, a
>war of opportunity launched by the Bush administration because the
>events of Sept. 11 gave it the cover to do so. If Iraq is now "the
>central front on the war on terror," it is because the Bush
>administration made it so by invading that country and threatening to
>turn it into the type of "failed nation" that produces terrorism.
>
>It is almost never wise to start a second war when the outcome of the
>first is still unsettled because you are inevitably forced to divide
>resources. With more than 100,000 troops and many billions of dollars
>committed to Iraq for years to come; with our limited Arabic-language
>intelligence assets now targeted at the Iraqi resistance, not at
>al-Qaida and its network; and with international support for our war
>on terror eroded by our high-handed invasion, we have committed the
>classic mistake of military overreach.
>
>The war on Iraq and the war on terror are two different struggles.
>Tackled separately, either would have taken us years to win. Tackling
>them simultaneously was tragic foolishness on a very large scale, no
>matter how much the president claims otherwise.
>
>Jay Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor. 
>
>© 2003 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution 
>http://www.ajc.com/

Bush seeks to increase, not decrease, terrorism, as he profits on it.